From the International Herald Tribune:
A police officer filed a criminal complaint Tuesday seeking to have a journalist for the British Broadcasting Corporation charged with insulting Thailand’s king. Lt. Col. Wattanasak Mungkandee said he filed a complaint against British reporter Jonathan Head in connection with remarks he allegedly made when moderating a panel discussion last year about Thailand’s monarchy. Insulting the monarchy, known as the crime of “lese majeste,” carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison. The statute reflects the deep devotion almost all Thais hold for the monarchy, and especially 80-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej. However, the charge is often used for political purposes as a way of smearing its targets, and relatively few cases come to court, with even fewer successfully prosecuted. Wattanasak said the police Crime Suppression Division will have to translate the evidence he presented to see whether it would pursue the case. Head said he had no immediate comment.
The report in The Nation (posted here by a New Mandala reader) indicates that the comments were made at a December 2007 event hosted by the Foreign Correspondent’s Club (FCC). I presume this was the launch of the special issue of the Journal of Contemporary Asia on Thaksin and the coup previously discussed here.
An article on the monarchy and the lèse majesté law by Jonathan Head is available here.
I have previously written (in relation to discussions of the monarchy at the International Conference on Thai Studies which was held in Bangkok about a month after the FCC event):
The key message of the panels was that the persistent self-censorship imposed by the international academic community can now be cast aside. The sky will not fall in if we talk freely and frankly about the king’s role in contemporary Thai politics. Let’s make sure this is a starting point for ongoing frank and public discussion.
I hope I am not proven wrong.
89 responses so far ↓
1 Observer // Apr 9, 2008 at 12:43 pm
This was my favorite part:
Now haven’t I heard that last name somewhere before?
2 Dog Lover // Apr 9, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Anyone know anything about Lt. Col. Wattanasak Mungkandee?
3 chris baker // Apr 9, 2008 at 1:06 pm
In Matichon, Wattanasak says ‘there is nothing political about this. I am doing this entirely on my personal account.’
The CSD police officer accepting the complaint, Pol Lt-Col Bunloet Kalyanamit (interesting surname…), said the next step was to check the translation from English to Thai, and consult academic experts on language whether the remarks are truly offensive.
At the moment, nobody knows what the offensive remarks were. I was there and I can’t remember Head saying anything risky. Does anyone else?
4 Song Kinh // Apr 9, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Andrew,
I found it interesting that the last time I was in Bangkok on a Monday.. only 2 weeks ago, there was a noticeable absence of the ghastly yellow shirts. The rate had dropped from about 80% of ‘Bangkokians’ to about 20%.
I was fortunate enough to attend a Harry Connick concert which one of the minor royals also attended. During the coup days, attendance of a Royal incurred the anthem and endless standing while they came in, and sat down. Again at the end the hapless audience is expected to stand (I find this painful, as despite my UK passport I never stood for the British Queen) as they all depart.
The Connick concert was interesting as only the two rows adjacent to the ‘royal row’ stood. As Connick played a dance number for his encore, the princesse’s row was engulfed by happily dancing Hi Sos’s. So much so, that the security team could not get in to let her out, She simply had to sit it out while everyone else took their leave. Sign of the times?
5 jonfernquest // Apr 9, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Assuming Head is tried and convicted will they even publish what he said?
Seems to be the norm in lese majeste cases to never describe what they actually did or said. Like that Mae Chi who was convicted up north a year or two ago. The article did not even say what she had done or said.
Seems like the police have a lot of leeway in which cases they take seriously or not. Any citizen can personally file a complaint, but are there a lot of complaints filed? There aren’t many that go to trial it seems, at least based on the complaints filed against Thaksin.
There doesn’t seem to be much transparency or information on this subject, Like Streckfuss’s dissertation, still haven’t been able to obtain a copy to read. The one copy at Thammasat has disappeared from the shelves. Seems like the police are the mysterious hidden, unquestioned because unquestionable information-wise, fount of power on this particular issue.
6 fall // Apr 9, 2008 at 5:40 pm
The sky will not fall in if we talk freely and frankly about the king’s role in contemporary Thai politics
Yes, it will.
Like talk about the Pope’s role in communicating God’s will in the middle age. Start definining dimension and roles, and there will be consequences.
This case is just a signal that full academic freedom in Thailand is not allow, some words are beyond contestation. Thai are democratic, but there are just something you cannot say about our great teacher and Dear Leader.
7 Srithanonchai // Apr 9, 2008 at 6:58 pm
From serving the king to serving the coup to serving the king…
HM the King appoints former PM Surayud as privy councillor
HM the King has appointed Ex-Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont as privy councillor.
Surayud was a privy councillor before resigning to take the premiership of the government installed after the coup d’etat.
The other two figures appointed as privy councillors were former Justice Minister and ex-Supreme Court Judge Charnchai Likitjitta and former Supreme Court Judge Supachai Phungam.
The appointment took effect on Tuesday.
The Nation, 9 April 2008
8 david w // Apr 9, 2008 at 9:58 pm
For those interested, David Streckfuss’s work on lese majeste is supposedly due out in monograph form in the future from Routledge. Hard to tell how it will have been revised from the dissertation. Also, since it is Routledge, the price will be appallingly high unfortunately.
http://www.amazon.com/Defamation-Social-Thailand-Rethinking-Southeast/dp/0415414253/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207738489&sr=1-1
9 david w // Apr 9, 2008 at 10:06 pm
It is apparently not only foreigners who are recently the subject of lese majeste charges.
*****
Thai couple faces lèse majesté charges for not standing for royal anthem in cinema
Prachatai
09 April 2008
News
A Thai man and his female friend have been charged by police with lèse majesté for not standing for the royal anthem at a movie theatre in Bangkok late last year.
On April 5, 2008, Pathumwan District Police called to Chotisak Onsung, 26, and his friend, asking them to visit the police station to hear the charge for the offence alleged by Navamintr Witthayakul, 40, who was among the cinema audience.
The lawyer for Chotisak and his friend, Songkran Pongbunjan, said that on Saturday, April 5, he met the police investigator to request a postponement to April 22 at 1.30pm because it was too soon for his clients to see the police that day.
Songkran said that according to the police investigator all witnesses had already been questioned, and a police committee had taken opinions from individuals and academics and decided to proceed the case. However, a panel under the National Police Committee will make the final decision on whether to pursue the case or not.
According to Songkran, Chotisak and his friend are likely to seek help from the Lawyers’ Council’s human rights committee.
On September 20, 2007, Chotisak and his friend went to a cinema in Central World shopping complex in downtown Bangkok. They were urged by Navamintr to stand up for the royal anthem which precedes every movie shown in Thailand’s cinemas, and they had a heated argument with the man. They claimed that they were physically abused. Afterwards they filed complaints at Pathumwan police station against Navamintr for verbal and physical abuse, damage to personal property and coercion, while Navamintr filed a lèse majesté complaint against them.
Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code stipulates the penalty for a lèse majesté offence as 3-15 years’ imprisonment.
Translated by Ponglert Pongwanan
10 serhat ünaldi // Apr 9, 2008 at 10:29 pm
I was at the FCC panel and, like Chris Baker, cannot remember any insulting remarks by Head regarding the monarchy (in fact, I’ve just checked the notes I took on that evening and Head’s introduction was apparently quite harmless and not very specific since I didn’t write much of what he said down). Compared to the openness of Kevin Hewison on that evening, Head truly limited himself to his role as host and moderator. It seems, Head is made the scapegoat for the whole evening. Craig Reynolds is proven right when he says with regards to Handley:
“Handley is a farang journalist. That’s what the fuss is about… The Thai government tends to worry more about foreign journalists than about academics in sensitive cultural matters, and Handley is a farang journalist – an outsider.” (see recent post at New Mandala).
But is this worry because opinions of journalists have a wider reach as compared to academics, or because the Thai government regards journalists more as outsiders in comparison with academics, which makes them less entitled to critisize?
11 Kevin Hewison // Apr 9, 2008 at 10:50 pm
I concur with Chris Baker. I don’t recall anything. But that may not be the point for this seemingly eccentric and protector of the monarchy. This probably fits the category: “you are warned.” I believe Mr. Head was warned about reporting the coup and king connection right after the coup, by the Foreign Ministry.
I don’t recall being particularly “open” in my initial comments, but was more outspoken in the Q&A perhaps. I was still being careful, realizing that this topic is potentially dangerous to all involved, especially Thai and Thailand-based colleagues.
12 Kevin Hewison // Apr 9, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Forgot to add that I was also crisiticized at NM for not being strong enough regarding the monarchy’s human rights record. So I guess I was way too careful for some.
13 jonfernquest // Apr 9, 2008 at 11:16 pm
davidw, thank you for the link to the Streckfuss book to be published and that not-standing-up-in-a-movie-theatre case, scary because the **lese majeste apparently provided an excuse for violence** which police action supported, which does seems rather micchādiṭṭhi = fallacy (f.), heathism (f.), infidelity (f.) (Pali), Pol Lt-Col Kalyanamit not living up to his name. Wouldn’t it have been better if they just kicked them both out of the movie theatre?
To some people talking about lese majeste in a critical fashion might actually constitute an act of lese majeste. This sort of logical conflation seems to be fairly common nowadays. Like being critical of the drug war is considered to be aiding and abetting drug dealers, rather than an honest concern about the integrity of legal truth finding and procedure.
14 serhat ünaldi // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:02 am
I agree that all panelist, including Kevin Hewison, were careful of what they said and successful in the balancing act of talking about monarchy without going too far. That’s why I was surprised reading the recent news. However, it seems that if “protectors of the monarchy” want to find fault with such events, or send out a warning, they will always find someone to blame (in this case one of the least likely actors considering what he actually said) however incoherent their accusations may be.
15 Thongchai // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:00 am
Why Head? Is it because of what he said or is it because of him being BBC? The Thai public would not remember the name, perhaps don’t even care what was said or not said, but the news and words will go like “BBC journalist was charged for the LM”
Why BBC? To send a “warning” signal to foreign journalists, is BBC the smart target to strike? The authorities could have sent an equally strong signal with less repurcussion and less international exposure of their own stupidity by choosing a smaller target.
On the other hand, please don’t rule out the possibility of a politically naive colonel who acted on his own believe. If so, the case will be resolved quickly and/or quietly.
In any case, the warning signal was already spread. At the least, the FCCT people must be chilled!! The FCCT forum might not be the same. I hope they are in good spirit and don’t budge.
Is this all the authorities want ? … and the case could be resolved quickly and/or quietly.
Re: Andrew’s remark —
No real battle is over in one strike. A few events (the monarchy panels or the FCCT ones) would not open up a free talk. I do think a public talk about the monarchy is a necessary thing to do in Thai society. We need to push the boundary. But it won’t be easy and won’t be welcomed. There were strikes back — yes, past tense. Do expect more.
Academics may be less vulnerable than journalists in certain ways. But there are certains ways that academics got struck back too. Anybody thinks doing this is for fame or personal gains never tries doing it himself.
16 Joerg Stimm // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:26 am
A recollection of reactions in internet forums on the incident of BBC reporter Jonathan head of the BBC being accused of ‘lese majeste’ can be found here: http://tropicalramblings.blogspot.com/2008/04/thai-police-file-lese-majeste-against.html
17 Kevin Hewison // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:42 am
Jonathan Head is targeted to send a message to all reporters (the vast majority of whom never say anything remotely critical of the monarchy anyway). At the same time, there is a similar message sent to academics by the fact that a number participated in the event.
18 polo // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:57 am
Bangkok Pundit points out that Lt. Col. Wattanasak Mungkandee is the same person who filed the lese majeste complaint in March against former Thaksin spokesman Jakrapob Penkair for something he said at the FCCT in August.
http://bangkokpundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/lese-majeste-and-jakrapob.html
http://bangkokpundit.blogspot.com/2008/04/first-they-came-for-jakrapob.html
I’d think there’s little liklihood that he is a “politically naive colonel” if he’s done this twice.
19 Surang Saitip // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:39 am
Lese majeste is certainly passe, and should be done away with. No public man publicly funded as well as publicly charged should be exempted from public scrutiny, unless we want Thailand to stay backward.
Incidentally, the reappointment of Surayudh and the appointment of two conservative former judges as privy councillors came as no surprise. And this vis-a-vis the “mysterious hand”!
20 Chris Fry // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:05 pm
It’s interesting that the moderators at Thai Visa have deleted the entire discussion of lese majeste charges made against Jonathan Head.If foreigners, admittedly in this case with a kowtowing track record, can be cowed in this way how much more can Thai journalists?
21 Observer // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Serhat, I think that foreigners are given more free reign than Thais to comment on issues such as the monarchy. If the New Mandala was a Thai-based website, it might have had it doors bashing in during the night and hosts carted off to jail. We just wouldn’t hear about it.
The claim that Handley was only opposed because he is a farang seems absurd. Any Thai who published that would be jailed if the royalist goons didn’t kill him or her first.
I do think this will backfire and the case will be dropped. However, if he is jailed, I will be the first to wear a “Free Head” tee-shirt.
22 Diogenes // Apr 10, 2008 at 1:36 pm
It is interesting that Head was charged for something that allegedly occurred in December of 2007 the day after a embarrassing piece he wrote about the Thailand’s elite appeared in print.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7328054.stm
23 Wendell // Apr 10, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Song Kinh,
I can’t remark about the treatment of royal at the Harry Connick concert other than to note that the amount of pomp involved in unofficial public appearances depends on the identity of the royal in question.
Regarding the absence of yellow shirts, a significant factor is that state officials (who had previously been essentially required to wear the yellow) are still under orders to wear black and white to mourn the passing of HRH Princess Galyani. That mourning period should be ending soon, so we will see if the yellow shirts return. (I have recently noted a few government/politics people starting to wear thier pink shirts again).
In any case, it is probably hasty to consider either the relative informality at the concert or the absence of yellow on the street as a sign of the times.
24 Nicholas // Apr 10, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Jonathan Head should go to prison for his low class behaviour, he has used the BBC for his own political propaganda in a foreign country - clearly evil. Most of us believe that he will be sentenced hard and might even end up sharing a VIP cell with Jakkapop.
The question is what on earth of Jonathan smoking when he wrote his piece insulting the Crown Prince and joking about pink suits?
Jonathan also hosted an event that apparently rammed into Elizabeth quite hard.
If Jonathan escapes the bookmakers stand to lose alot of money - I doubt it will be the full 15 years, perhaps just 6 months as a lesson to this ignorant paparazzi journo on an ego trip.
The most important question is who is the mysterious hand behind Jakkrapop and Jonathan?
Who i s financing this propaganda?
What is Jonathan’s motive?
has he forgotten about newspaper ethics?
25 Dawid // Apr 10, 2008 at 9:43 pm
To injure the king is to injure his sacred royal body - the mandalic nation, its a loss of face for Thais.
Thais need a day like the ‘feast of fools’ in medieval Europe,
mock the king and monarchy, politicians etc just for a day,
let out all the repressed energy for goodness sake.
26 Dog Lover // Apr 10, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Nicholas : Very funny indeed. I think the CIA might be behind all this anti-king propaganda. They have it in for the royals. They are secretly trying to establish Anglo-American hegemony by wiping out feudal vestiges worldwide. They use media figures to do this.
27 Teth // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Observer, you should know that there are Thai websites even more fierce than New Mandala. Plenty.
The thing is that they keep their security tight. Recently one was harassed and has moved their hosting overseas.
28 Teth // Apr 10, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Dog-Lover, strange you should call it “Anglo-American” since the most prominent vestiges of feudalism lies in the Kingdom of HM Elizabeth II, Dei Gratia Britanniarum Regnorumque Suorum Ceterorum Regina, Consortionis Populorum Princeps, Fidei Defensor.
29 Is Jonathan Head going down for lese majeste? | Thailand's Lost Boy // Apr 11, 2008 at 5:02 am
[...] aside, Jonathan Head, the BBC’s Thailand correspondent, could be in serious trouble. Thanks to New Mandala and Andrew for covering this. From IHT: A police officer filed a criminal complaint Tuesday seeking [...]
30 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 11, 2008 at 5:39 am
I’d think there’s little liklihood that he is a “politically naive colonel” if he’s done this twice.
It only takes 1 nationalist zealot to press a complaint, but there must be a couple of people behind. I doubt anyone from the Sri Sao Thewes area or the Palace is involved and would look more in the direction of right wing nationalists. It is more likely just a couple of individuals with agendas to push. I think the question is, who brought the DVDs from the FCCT for both complaints? NOTE: In both cases, a DVD was provided to the police as evidence and DVDs, as I understand, can be brought from the FCCT. Someone must have brought them, exactly how many are sold? Has someone been buying them all and combing through them? Or is it just these two? There can’t be that many people who buy them.
I understand Head used the word “murky” at one stage - because as we all know Prem and HM the King are above politics to to suggest otherwise is well a no-no so it can’t be considered “murky”.
31 Lleij Samuel Schwartz // Apr 11, 2008 at 6:18 am
re: Dawid
Thais need a day like the ‘feast of fools’ in medieval Europe
Don’t they already have Songkran? The ones I’ve experienced have been the closest thing to Saturnalia in this modern world. Or, perhaps, is Songkran closer to the medieval Festum Asinorum?
Io, Saturnalia!
Sankranti svaha!
32 Dog Lover // Apr 11, 2008 at 11:04 am
Teth: I was being facetious.
33 Non Thangthai // Apr 11, 2008 at 11:13 am
In Thailand we have academic fawning in place of academic freedom. One must fawn if he knows what is good for him. Look at all the honorary degrees “humbly presented” to the royalty, and one wonders if Thai universities have not gone berserk. And royal persons can be nothing but first academically at any Thai university, which means of course first-class honors. So the key words here are “fawn” and “fake”.
34 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 11, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Khun BP writes:
It only takes 1 nationalist zealot to press a complaint, but there must be a couple of people behind. I doubt anyone from the Sri Sao Thewes area or the Palace is involved and would look more in the direction of right wing nationalists.
Actually, the first group I think of is the Si Sao people, either receiving instruction from their Master or doing it out of blind loyalty to their boss. The question I ask is : Who would want to get Jakkraphob? I think Mr Head’s case is a kind of ‘by product’ of the first target, a warning-intemidation to foreigners. The Si Sao circle would fit both purposes quite perfectly in my view.
Another possibility, however strange it may seem, is someone inside the PPP-Thaksin camp itself. Someone who has a grudge against Jakkraphob. But it is difficult to imagine the PPP-Thaksin people wanting to alienate foreign journalists at this time.
P.S. Is my usual email being blocked here? Everytime I use it to post I got rejected. I have to use another email to even see the message “your post await moderation.” Pleae explain. Thank you.
35 chris baker // Apr 11, 2008 at 1:28 pm
If you spend 600 baht on the VCD of the 23 December session of FCCT, you’ll find Jonathan Head does not say very much except in his introductory remarks as moderator. As part of setting the scene for the book launch, he mentioned in passing ‘that murky issue of what role, what influence does the institution of the monarchy
have.’
Now try looking up ‘murky’ in an English-Thai dictionary. Most give มืด and มืดมัว (roughly: dark) among the first few options.
So has Jonathan Head just been lost in translation? Maybe. But I suspect it is not quite so simple. In the second half of last year, the FCCT held two sessions which touched on the monarchy. These complaints are an unsubtle way to warn the club against getting into the habit of this sort of thing. In this case the complaint is against the only journalist involved (not the three Thai achan, not the farang achan) because that sends a message to the club.
36 Rati Niramit // Apr 11, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Lese majeste is not so easy as laissez majeste. This “majeste” is free to anything at will. In some cases he seems to exhibit a symptom of senility. For example, he told a group of judges to intervene in the administration of the country, clearly confusing the executive branch and the judicial branch, which was against the constitution. Of course, nobody openly objected, for this “majeste” is a super-being incapable of making human errors.
37 Observer // Apr 11, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Teth: Good points about Thai websites. My pount is that the persecution has not been directed at farang alone.
Somsak: I tend to agree with the indirect Sri Sao link theory. Some sycophant suck up eager to bring a a goodie to his boss to get a reward or protection from something. The first thing I thought of was whether a policeman in the recent car theft scandal needs to brush up royalist credentials to aid in his immunity. But that does sound a bit too cynical, even for me.
At the end of the day Chris Baker’s theory resonates. Kill a chicken to sacre the monkies. It does seem that someone wants to keep those farang journos in line.
38 serhat ünaldi // Apr 11, 2008 at 10:11 pm
# 21, 37 observer: I think the contrast Craig Reynolds wanted to highlight in the quote I cited was not between farang and Thai, but between farang journalists and (farang) academics. And among these groups, the latter seem to be “less vulnerable than journalists in certain ways”, as Thongchai notes, though certainly not immune.
39 jonfernquest // Apr 11, 2008 at 11:23 pm
I think the police are trying to be a little murky here and scary at that.
As the British National Corpus clearly shows, there are a lot of neutral usages, perhaps with a slight dash of negative, but you can’t expect journalists to be bubbly and vivacious cheerleaders all the time:
* The government is now set to have a fresh stab at changing what all sides in the debate agree are murky laws.
We’re about as well-positioned as anyone to succeed in the murky environment that fiscal 1993 looks like it will be.
* People either reached for the mediaeval Holy Roman Empire as a model, which had been constituted quite differently and which was, as a result, very misleading in a number of different ways, or, hardly less disastrously, for the murky concept of the Volk.
* In the interests of shedding a hard journalistic light on a somewhat murky area we decided to pay them a visit.
* The question of US military casualties remains murky.
* But these are murky areas into which the unwary amateur ventures at his peril.
Dark and gloomy examples:
* I would be wary of eating anything caught in these murky waters.
* A most terrible appearance, the dense mass of clouds being covered with a murky tinge, with fierce flashes of lightning.
* The pond is murky with dead leaves which are decomposing.
* Divers found the waters were so murky that they could see nothing and had to make their search by touch.
* The melon was boiled and brought to Dot next dinner time with her chicken broth all around like a shattered building surrounded by deep trenches full of murky rainwater.
…the murky green of the lower waters of the Amazon River…
* The sea was a dull murky green, and angry.
* The water was thick and murky, full of currents that ran rudely against her face.
Catfish of several species do so and appear to be calling to one another as they move in murky water.
* I don’t know, my Lord, but the waters I am wading through are deep, murky and treacherous.
* Stop burning the candle at both ends or you’ll have more murky mornings.
* Yes, sea-trout had indeed returned to the murky river but not via the Clyde as everyone thought.
There are some negative conceptual ones:
* Another shaft of light into the murky depths of the human psyche was alleged to be cast by the discovery of the brand image.
40 Teth // Apr 12, 2008 at 2:26 am
Dog Lover, I realize, but its always interesting to bring up the British situation.
41 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 15, 2008 at 6:43 pm
But I suspect it is not quite so simple. In the second half of last year, the FCCT held two sessions which touched on the monarchy. These complaints are an unsubtle way to warn the club against getting into the habit of this sort of thing. In this case the complaint is against the only journalist involved (not the three Thai achan, not the farang achan) because that sends a message to the club.
Jonathan was also the moderator for Jakrapob’s presentation. My suspicions on who is likely behind the event and why the Sri Sao Thewes crowd is not involved is based on the fact that someone has an agenda/problem against the FCCT. Someone has posted a few video links to my blog in the past on FCCT events and they use the cyberak name - video from Jakrapob presentation here and from Coup, Capital and Crown here. The profile states they work for Phyakrut and if you google Phyakrut you get his rantings here. If you scroll past his rantings on this page you will see he has scanned a letter the FCCT sent to him. This person is not a happy chappy. You should note the wording he uses “Khan tried to protect Thailand’s national interests”. He has also accompanied police in different raids as you can see from his videos. He has both videos, an agenda against the FCCT, and a crusader-type attitude.
btw, Jonathan was also the moderator when Jakrapob spoke.
42 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 18, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Interesting new development:
Faw Diew Kan webboard has published full text of a new accusing letter by the police officer who instigates LM charge against Jonathan Head.
http://www.sameskybooks.org/board/index.php?showtopic=7237
There’s a note accompanying the letter, inviting media to the Police HQ to witness the hand over of this letter, together with “new evidence” which “will show that Nai Jonathan Head doesn’t commit less majesty (หมิ่นเบื้องสูง) alone, but - it can be believed - is part of a concerted movement.“
43 chris baker // Apr 20, 2008 at 12:12 am
Thank you FDK and Somsak.
The evidence promised in the letter of invitation to journalists is all material found on the BBC website. The letter highlights this quote from an article on the Jufer case, dated 12 March 2007.
The king is 79 years old and in uncertain health. His son, the crown prince, does not enjoy the same affection that his father does, and many Thais feel he cannot fill his father’s shoes. These concerns are well-known in Bangkok; less so in the countryside.
However, the last and crucial paragraph of the invitation letter illogically but nastily transforms the issue:
Mr Jonathan Head habitually speaks and writes critically about the monarchy, often and consistently. Both on the BBC website and at FCCT, his words have the same character, namely that he must criticize the monarchy. It can be seen that Mr Jonathan Head is not acting alone. It is credible that there must be people behind this, acting together as a movement. Such action is a severe danger to the security of the nation. Thus Crime Suppression Division is requested to make investigations to expose those involved to punishment under law.
44 Srithanonchai // Apr 20, 2008 at 12:34 am
Do they actually teach advanced English translation courses at Srithanya Hospital? Maybe, that policeman should check in?
45 Piyaporn // Apr 20, 2008 at 4:46 am
การที่ที่นายชวน หลีกภัย ประธานสภาที่ปรึกษาพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ ออกมาระบุว่า มีขบวนการโจมตีองคมนตรี ทำให้แกนนำพรรคพลังประชาชนเรียงหน้าออกมาท้าท้ายให้อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรีนำหลักฐานออกมาเปิดเผย โดยเฉพาะ ร.ต.อ.เฉลิม อยู่บำรุง รัฐมนตรีว่าการกระทรวงมหาดไทยเรียกร้องให้นายชวนเปิดเผยตัวบุคคลและที่มาไม่ใช่แต่การกล่าวลอยๆและให้ไปแจ้งความดำเนินคดีเอาผิดกับคนแจกใบปลิว
จากข้อเรียกดังกล่าวเมื่อวันที่ 18 เมษายนที่ผ่านมานายเทพไท เสนพงศ์ ผู้ช่วยเลขาธิการพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ ได้นำแฟ้มเอกสาร 2 แฟ้ม ที่เป็นสำเนาข้อความโจมตีพรรคประชาธิปัตย์ องคมนตรี ที่ได้จากฟอร์เวิร์ดเมล์ ผ่านเครือข่ายอินเตอร์เน็ต สำเนาบทความในเว็บไซต์ ไฮ-ทักษิณ จดหมาย ใบปลิว ส.ค.ส. และถุงพลาสติคใส่ขนเพชร มาแสดงต่อผู้สื่อข่าว เพื่อเป็นการยืนยันคำพูดของนายชวน
นายเทพไท กล่าวว่า รัฐบาลรู้เรื่องนี้ดีโดยเฉพาะเรื่อง ‘ก้อนกรวดในรองพระบาท’ ที่มีการแจกเอกสารในภาคอีสาน และนายสมัคร สุนทรเวช นายกรัฐมนตรี เคยพูดว่า พบหนังสือดังกล่าว และบอกว่าเป็นหนังสือที่น่าสนใจ จากนั้นมีการนำมาเผยแพร่ในเว็บไซต์ ไฮ-ทักษิณ เสนอภาพเสียดสีโจมตี พล.อ.เปรม ติณสูลานนท์ ประธานองคมนตรีในลักษณะที่ไม่เหมาะสม และยังมีการดัดแปลงโปสเตอร์ที่รณรงค์ยาเสพติดมาเป็นโจมตี มีการส่ง ส.ค.ส.ด้วยคำหยาบคาย ที่รัฐบาลมีหลักฐานเหล่านี้อยู่ แต่ทำเป็นไม่รู้ไม่ชี้ นายกฯต้องเข้าไปดูแล แต่ถ้ายังเรียกหาหลักฐานอีกจะจัดส่งไปให้
หลังจากที่นายเทพไทนำเอกสารพร้อมขนเพชรมาโชว์ นายสมัคร ปฏิเสธที่จะพูดถึงเรื่องนี้เพราะไม่อยากเดือดร้อน
ขณะที่ร.ต.อ.เฉลิม ยืนยันว่า ” ฝ่ายรัฐบาลใครจะไปปัญญาทึบขนาดโจมตี พล.อ.เปรม มันไม่มีประโยชน์อะไร พวกเราไม่ได้ทำอย่างเด็ดขาด และหลายฝ่ายชอบเอาเรื่องอย่างนี้มาเป็นประเด็นและนำไปสู่ความขัดแย้ง”
46 Nissara // Apr 20, 2008 at 9:10 am
It seems like this issue is growing, some interesting pictures of Jonathan Head and Thaksin on the Fah Diew Gan site now that seem to say it all.
As a Thai I do find the words of both Jonathan and Jakrapob highly offensive and cannot forgive either of them. I have listened to a copy of the DVD from the FCCT and find such evil propaganda disgusting.
Jonathan and Jakrapob also talk about the illegal CDs upcountry that Chuan is now exposing in parliament.
Is this is a real conspiracy or just another theory?
47 Dog Lover // Apr 21, 2008 at 2:20 am
Nissara says, “As a Thai I do find the words of both Jonathan and Jakrapob highly offensive and cannot forgive either of them. I have listened to a copy of the DVD from the FCCT and find such evil propaganda disgusting.” Leaving Jakrapob aside, which words, exactly, are “evil propaganda” from Mr Head or even “highly offensive” to your Thai ears?
48 Teth // Apr 21, 2008 at 8:43 am
Jonathan and Jakrapob also talk about the illegal CDs upcountry that Chuan is now exposing in parliament.
Why should Chuan be exposing this in Parliament?
Last I heard, the Privy Council is not above criticism. Nor is it a matter of national importance that deserves to be discussed in an elected legislature. Honestly, I would quite like this to be even bigger news, just like I would like Handley’s book to make big news. It will be a tiny step towards more transparency in the muddy Palatial waters even if the initial response will be overwhelmingly negative. Having something to counter all the propaganda in the public eye is better than nothing at all. One of the basis for the assumptions of the King’s perfection is the perceived lack of dissent.
49 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 21, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Nissara: It seems like this issue is growing, some interesting pictures of Jonathan Head and Thaksin on the Fah Diew Gan site now that seem to say it all.
I confess to once being at a dinner function and Bush and Thaksin were 10 metres away. Please nail to me the cross for my sins. No journalist should dare to interview a leader, it is just so unbecoming.
As a Thai I do find the words of both Jonathan and Jakrapob highly offensive and cannot forgive either of them. I have listened to a copy of the DVD from the FCCT and find such evil propaganda disgusting.
Which parts were offensive? Can we have a hint? Is the word murky offensive?
Jonathan and Jakrapob also talk about the illegal CDs upcountry that Chuan is now exposing in parliament.
Really, weren’t these the election CDs that Jonathan was referring to? Were they to do with Prem?
So the BBC is on the conspiracy (you do realize the BBC is funded by the British government, so it could be a New Labourite plot to take over Thailand)? Or is it just Jonathan Head?
50 Maleewan // Apr 22, 2008 at 6:46 am
So Pundit says it is a plan to attack Thailand - interesting,
I would love to learn more about this,
I heard Tesco are now suing Thai newspapers and academics, does this have anything to do with it?
probably a coincidence.
51 Dog Lover // Apr 22, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Oh Maleewan, you miss the nuances of the post and its irony.
52 david w // Apr 23, 2008 at 7:40 am
Interesting interview at Prachatai with the Thai man charged with lese majeste for not standing in movie theatre.
http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=607
53 Land of Snarls // Apr 23, 2008 at 8:20 am
L.S.S.(#31), I think you missed the point of the reference to the Feast of Fools. It’s a situation of misrule, in which the people have license to satirise the monarchy, the church, & whatever other institutions are normally repressing them. No relation to Songkhran. Nothing like satire happens in this airhead festival.
And Teth, why is it “always interesting to bring up the British situation”? This is a discussion on lese majeste. Do you have some pearls of wisdom re. the Brits in relation to lese majeste?
One of my favourite Monty Python sketches (a cartoon) shows Princess Margaret, well-known to the world (largely through media reports) as a pisspot, as was her mother, at a coctail party. She stops the action by declaring loudly that she must go & ‘powder her nose’. She exits through a door, stage left. The other guests are then treated to the most disgustingly vulgar series of sound effects that have nothing whatever to do with putting powder on one’s nose, and everything to do with what we all know the euphemism stands for.
Monty Python’s Flying Circus was a comedy programme produced by the BBC, the British government’s broadcaster, from 1969 to 1974. Many readers of NM will know this. I mention it only because your constant references to the history & culture of other countries, in order to draw entirely erroneous analogies to Thailand shows only the most superficial knowledge of history. (reminds me of Terwiell’s analysis of Rama IV’s erudition - ” a kind of name-dropping.” This pretty well sums up Thai education today, as well - it comes from the fact that students can go all the way through an alleged academic degree programme without ever writing an essay, only doing multiple -choice exams.) U.K. is certainly not perfect, but it can surely, despite all of its outrageous & often hilarious mistakes, which are (as they should be) slammed viciously by the media (& parodied & satirised), & have been for a very long time, hundreds of years in some cases, stand up as THE leader in the pursuit of democracy & the demolition of bullshit. That it has been able to develop in this direction, although a monarchy, is one of the most fascinating studies of history, including & especially, the history of English literature.
Personally, I believe that Swift (18th century) created Thailand. He probably left it out of Gulliver’s Travels because of the dreaded LM law, and all the Dull-Ploddies who use it. It wouldn’t have been a witty or intelligent court case. Very boring. Slow-learners, really.
54 Teth // Apr 23, 2008 at 10:19 am
Oh how Thais love our conspiracy theories. Wonderful is it not.
55 Teth // Apr 23, 2008 at 10:38 am
The British situation is always so intriguing as the pioneer of constitutional monarchy. I found it funny when someone asked me what it means to be Duke of Edinburgh. Somehow that man is supposed to be the feudal lord of Edinburgh. But yet, he is caricatured, accused by another rather odd man of a conspiracy, and probably has more official responsibilities than prerogatives as he is jetted around the world to shake hands with locals and watch indigenous dances.
Monarchy itself is an odd institution, and LM is a big part of maintaining its facade here in Thailand. It somehow creates the belief that the institution is above reproach. But why? And for what? Much like the pointlessness of having a title such as the Duke of Edinburgh or perhaps the whole pointlessness of modern monarchies itself.
Another interesting aspect of the British situation are the old laws that are still in place but are de facto repealed. Should lese majeste travel that route? Or should it be repealed along with the very institution of monarchy? Because clearly, the law is ridiculous, but so is a monarchy. Except, of course, for the fact that it provides emotional support to many, but then again, the same could be said about lese majeste to the hardline conservative royalists.
About Swift…….I think the whole world is mad, Thailand is no special case. Every country in the world needs a unit of the Bullshit Busters even the so-called “leaders”. But you are right, Britain is miles ahead in the Premier Bullshit Busting League than Thailand.
56 sueksit nanhuay // Apr 23, 2008 at 11:54 am
Rest easy now, you all. Now there is a new book by Dennis Grey in praise of the big chief, who was so good as to grant audience to Grey in appreciation of his great work. So you see, you reap a handsome reward for doing something “oh so good”.
57 Slow .. le .. lear ... lernerr // Apr 23, 2008 at 11:59 am
Thank you for these informative and sometimes just downright hilarious (not always intentionally) posts.
It’s true Jonathan did always enjoy Monty Python. It just goes to show that children should be kept from the media until they are 30 and only fed state-regulated information, diluted with a steady stream of anthems from around the world.
I blame Monty Python - I shall draft a letter from my Californian Lawyer immediately and report back after OJ and I have discussed our defense. I mean… attack …
58 Grasshopper // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:01 am
Land of Snarls: You say THE leader in the pursuit of democracy & the demolition of bullshit. The demolition of bullshit? Thought it would have to be smoothed over - I imagine a Terry Gilliam wall of bullshit kicked by the giant foot. The pursuit of democracy? The international precedent for Britain and democracy has been only a hubris for you and me to swallow. Much like human rights, much like anything attached to the word ‘liberal’ - it doesn’t exist as an example for other peoples from elsewhere, because how many other cultures adopt empiricism as a basis for societal structure?
The British as a collective, are animals and so are you and I, but university educated, the ‘enlightened’, those who are ‘civil’ have had to be in such denial about their animal; that the animal is something to be repressed which leads to playing the poker face only to reveal themselves ‘correct’ and most righteous at the end of any argument about what it is to be civil — makes enlightened civility the most loathsome culture found in all animals. This faux, idolatrous humility gives the sucker punch of correctness. Of course, British civil and common law and indeed the crux of liberalism (rights) is based in of a monotheistic god (as Teth reflects - Britons like to repel these laws, but the birth of British law cannot deny it’s roots, much the same as I cannot deny that my father is my father even though I might like too), and in much the same way, Thai law is based on a living deity. What counts is that you are in the right social circle if you want to advance yourself. What counts as justice is that one is around people who have had the greasy pole of civility thrust upon them more intensely than someone who has no time for such triviality.
The only true humility is in thinking, local societies whose members are not ashamed of the animal within; being monkey’s that we were before being brainwashed with societal hierarchies. In this space, unjust, arbitrary aggression and social dysfunction is nullified and peace can be present enough for there to be a narrow avenue of progress within a world caught up in the denial of being biological.
“And the end of all our searching shall be to return to the place where we started and know it for the first time.”
59 Land of Snarls // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Grasshopper, thank you for the lecture. Given that the word ‘empiricism’ means, ‘the belief in basing your ideas on the evidence of practical experience,’ I would say the answer to your question is most societies, to some degree, although they are all muddling through.
“The pursuit of democracy?” Yes, that’s what I said. “Pursuit” is the important word. “…only a hubris for you and me to swallow,” speak for yourself. I don’t swallow the overwheening arrogance of any peoples. I ridicule it. I am entirely free to do that in Australia & UK (expected to, actually); not free at all to do it in Thailand (especially in the “local societies whose members are not ashamed of the animal within,” if by that you mean the villages), China, etc., etc.; only somewhat free to do it in US.
“This faux, idolatrous humility” (c.f.Thailand, in every sector of society)
British civil & common law is also based on the thought of the Greeks, not monotheistic.
“What counts is that you are in the right social circle if you want to advance yourself,” depends on what you mean by “advance yourself.” People in any society network and form cliques. In UK, since the 60s, there has been a significant breakdown in all areas, including academia, the arts, and business. I would say, having had experience in both countries, that in some ways Australia, being smaller & more cliquey, is much more difficult for many without pre-existing connexions to break into, e.g. the arts, than UK.
Where are your “thinking, local societies whose members are not ashamed of the animal within”? Smacks of the Noble Savage!
60 Grasshopper // Apr 25, 2008 at 12:02 am
Land of Snarls, That’s right, the noble savage!!! That’s where we’re headed. Back to the cozy cocoon womb of universality. Thanks for the lecture?! A first!!!
I think I kicked the hacky sack too hard last night. My leg broke in many places and my foot landed in my mouth. Or should that be, my fingers were ablaze with seething contempt and melted into the keyboard messing up what I aught to have said, which was nothing at all.
Yes, there are so many inconsistencies in my goo of a reply that probably the most progressive thing for me to admit is that the biggest hypocrisy in what I wrote is illuminating my own hubris as a ‘maybe values are relative’ sort of person, by damning what I’m from; when what I’m from allows me to damn it.
Although, that is a great failsafe for being right at the end… that ‘you can say what you want’… but to whom is one saying this too? A clique as you mention? You say ‘depends on what you mean by advancing yourself’, but without others to tell you, that you are ’something’, then it is the ‘if a leaf falls in the forest and no-one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?!’ scenario, and not a pragmatic social concept. A great social power is where one is able to gain power by giving others power; so if there are a few people with such tremendous power that they are able to shape the perceptions of individuals then the social system is irrelevant because the perceptions of individuals are determined by whomever it is with the power. So would I be wrong in saying that power cannot be democratized?
Or does democracy empower the people? Would I be wrong in saying that only if everyone is aware of democracy on an idealistic level is it empowering? Maybe I underestimate how many people appreciate it on an idealistic level.
Rupert Murdoch - our King Bhumibol? David Hicks - our Jonathon Head? Unlike the arguments Republican used to present, I have decided that because of these relative similarities in power relations, I cannot damn the Thai monarchy or it’s governance system because it is as ours - dependent on centralized power. And that I am from a society of centralized power allows me the luxury of being a sheep to it, as I was through this day and probably tomorrow. Speaking for myself, of course.
So whilst interrupting the lovely hacky sack circle that was going on above (or maybe it had already stopped and I just wanted to kick it), my point is lese majeste is just a more obvious power (for us here on New Mandala) than ones Westerners are inadvertently subservient too, and for better international utility, I don’t think it is terribly wise for Jonathon Head to be the pot calling the kettle black.
This is probably riddled with inconsistencies too, but to decentralize power, and therefore, to have democracy itself as a source of social empowerment, societies must be small enough for everyone to understand their actions to be of significance and not subservient to any other - because as we are witness to power centralized and can see (and in lots of cases cannot see) what that has meant.
Where are these Noble Savages? At Foucault cliques in San Francisco of course!
61 Grasshopper // Apr 25, 2008 at 12:26 am
and as for …attached to the word ‘liberal’ - it doesn’t exist as an example for other peoples from elsewhere, because how many other cultures adopt empiricism as a basis for societal structure? I meant that we have both liberalism through empiricism, we empirically believe that to be liberal is best based on past practical experience, but to be liberal in this way as a basis of social structure?
What is it to be a liberal empirically? Experience gives us options through hindsight - and options provide freedom of choice. Consequently, our society permits us to make as many mistakes as we can - and to learn in a way that shows us that the option one chooses was a mistake. Again we are closer to the greasy pole of centralized power! The ones who determine what is a mistake. Without them, could we be as liberal?
How many other societies are based on an ethic such as this? I am ignorant after all. I should make this mistake and ask!
62 Land of Snarls // Apr 25, 2008 at 10:20 am
Grasshopper - what is a ‘hackysack circle’? Sounds fascinating.
63 Teth // Apr 25, 2008 at 11:48 pm
I can answer that for Grasshopper. Its the tiny bean bags that are kicked about in a circle of people–with the goal of not allowing it to hit the ground.
Continue with your interesting argument.
64 Hobbit // Apr 27, 2008 at 4:38 pm
“… don’t think it is terribly wise for Jonathon Head to be the pot calling the kettle black.” - Grasshopper - Head has a job to do. It is his JOB to observe and comment and maybe he does a sterling job of being objective, maybe not, but if all of us were to wait until we were pure of heart and intention ….
…… nobody would ever say anything.
65 arthur // Apr 27, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Jonathan has clearly sold his integrity, it is as plain as pie, any media analyst knows he is in bed with Thaksin
66 Teth // Apr 27, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Jonathan has clearly sold his integrity, it is as plain as pie, any media analyst knows he is in bed with Thaksin
By media analyst do you mean Sondhi Limthongkul?
Please substantiate your statement.
67 Dog Lover // Apr 27, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Grasshopper: “my point is lese majeste is just a more obvious power than ones Westerners are inadvertently subservient too, and for better international utility, I don’t think it is terribly wise for Jonathon Head to be the pot calling the kettle black.”
Why is it not wise? I don’t get the point. Because there are “murky” aspects to democracy in the West - including the role of the private media (such as Murdoch’s) Head, as the BBC’s assigned correspondent shouldn’t comment on Thai politics? That is an odd view. Let’s not have any foreign correspondents? In any case people and reporters in, say, Britain and the US do have the capacity to criticise institutions such as the media (look at Chomsky’s books) and the British crown.
athur: your comment is a an obvious part of the palace campaign to discredit all people who they don’t like. Say it often enough and the charge sticks. The BBC reported on Thaksin in critical terms many, many times. You are a tool of feudalists and a fool to boot.
68 Grasshopper // Apr 28, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Dog lover: It is not wise soley because there are murky aspects to democracy in the West. That was just a haphazard example.
I think ‘objectivity’ in reporting is dependent on the culture one is from, and is therefore, subjective — unless one is able to articulate, like an anthropologist the cultural circumstance surrounding the issue. I made the point that the West’s abililty to criticize itself and reform allows Westerners to claim a socially enlightened position toward the rest of the world. Which is exactly what I’m doing now - so if you don’t understand my point, you can understand that I am wrong! We have convinced ourselves of our righteousness such that it has become a prophecy. I don’t think much of prophecies (at this moment..)
More pragmatically, I make the point that Western democracy is much more subversive due to the power of un-elected civil servants who remain constant compared to the ever changing elected representatives. They interpret what those elected say and implement policy — maybe this is flawed though, because in Australia so many elected politicians are lawyers…
“Lawyers: Having the public’s best interests at heart post Hitler.” - me
I asked a loaded question at the end of my last rant, which nobody attempted to bite — so I will just say that all I am advocating for is an acceptance of pluralism amongst all concerned(I am not condoning what lese majeste is, but equally I am not defending Jonathon Head who has held many foreign postings and should know better.)
If this is not clear, I apologize and bid you good day Winston. mwahahaha… :S
69 Observer // Apr 28, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Grasshopper,
So should the New York Times reporter current imprisoned in Zimbabwe also “have known better”? Or should he have ignored the oppressive efforts of the brutal Mugabe regime to limit the information available to the world, as he did?
I don’t think it is Jonathan Head who should know better, it is the power that keep using the LM law to eliminate dissent. The law only worked in the past because of careful use and the absense of the ability to comment anonymously via internet. Applying it to international reporter who may have trod on a thin grey line is guaranteed to backfire.
70 Dog Lover // Apr 28, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Grasshopper: Relativist drivel can be used to justify all kinds of human rights abuses. Those Burmese suffocated to death should have known better. They have heard of abuses before. So should those Tak Bai protesters. They know the Thai military are a pack of murdering bastards, so they should have known better and gone home and watched TV.
71 Grasshopper // Apr 29, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Observer, You make it sound like Bearak is a ground breaking journalist. There are many Zimbabwe news blogs such as kubatana.net that he could have gotten so much information from without being a martyr for cosmopolitan journalism. Drawing from Zimbawean scholar Miles Tendi, particulaly his article ‘Britain should help by staying away’,(I previously posted a link in this comment, but the spam eater appears to have digested it) what positive impact would Barry Bearak (who was released a few days ago?) have had in Zimbabwe? Informing the ‘world’ of an already dire situation by fanning the flames of what has fueled Mugabe for so long?
Jonathon Head should know better because he is a middle aged man and not Tintin.
As I say, I am not condoning the LM law, but societal law is arbitrary. I think ‘arbitrary’ law is unjust because it will always disadvantage a few inadvertantly due to the variables of circumstance. Head is now one of the few.. Although I like Rawls, I can’t see his ideas as more practical than philosopher kings in a twighlight zone.
Can you imagine a Southern Thai Muslim reporter gaining access to Washington and asking good questions?
Dog Lover, I am not advocating cultural relativism. I do not think that the situations are just and I believe that the people in them are suffocated by what is going on and I believe that many know they are being suffocated regardless of whether or not liberalism is known of or even appealing. I do not think the language of ‘rights’ is adequate for the intent of human rights. I believe that Jonathon Head should value the liberty he was born into and realise that this ideal is not an ‘option’ to many people he is surrounded by.. I’m not against activism, I am for tact and diplomacy… I would have thought confrontation in issues such as this promotes relativism, so I find your accusation ironic!
72 Dog Lover // Apr 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm
You should read your own drivel as an outsider would. It is pretentious and just plain silly at times. It reads relativist to me, including the comment on human rights with rights in inverted commas.
73 Grasshopper // Apr 29, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Dog Lover, plain silly? Oh.
Rights are relative. Rights are not universal. How can something embeded in the magna carta be deemed universal to those who give liberalism, and more importantly, Christianity no credence?
Sure I am pretentious and pompous, and you are not?
74 Grasshopper // Apr 29, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Here is a great quote for you Dog Lover:
Because human rights transcend individual regimes and customs. The beliefs inscribed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were not invented 50 years ago. They are not the work of a single culture or country. They have been with us forever, from civilization’s first light. Sophocles wrote about them 2,500 years ago when he had Antigone declare that there were ethical laws higher than the laws of Theban kings. P.C. Chang, who helped draft the Universal Declaration, pointed out that Confucius articulated them in ancient China. The belief that we must respect our neighbors as we would respect ourselves resides at the core of the teachings of all the major faiths of the world. - Hillary Clinton, universalist supremo.
Wow. Get a sense of humor you boob. Look at this from what an outsider might think? Why would I care what whomever might think? Im using a moniker and so are you.
Get the Pope to lobby for dog rights, I’d support that. Poor dogs.
75 Grasshopper // Apr 29, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I thought I better respond to…’it reads relativist to me’ I don’t know how to respond to that one. You win! I believe in a universal nature, but the way universality is wielded by people who can write ‘it reads relativist to me’, is just the same as someone saying ‘damn looks like a homo… sechsual’ in Alabama.
If you are a masochist Dog Lover, I suggest you checkout another pompous baboon named Isaiah Berlin. He didn’t have anything to hide by using a moniker…
76 Dog Lover // Apr 30, 2008 at 12:19 am
Seems I struck a nerve. Your comments still are read by me as being a justification for cultural relativism and the more you rant, the more it seems so and the sillier it sounds. I don’t know much about Clinton - not someone I hold out for pearls of wisdom but are you using her to support your position or as an example of universalism? Of course, I am familiar with Berlin. But univeralism does have an intellectual basis (as does cultural relativism on this issue). I suppose I could quote LKY, Mahathir and other relativatists on Asian Values and human rights and the responses they got from other Asian leaders who think that there is something in a notion of human rights that matter to people facing oppression. No point I guess.
77 Grasshopper // Apr 30, 2008 at 1:57 am
There is a point, I’d be very interested to read these responses. I’d also be interested to know the backgrounds of these leaders. If my reaction justifies relativism, yours justifies imperialism and cultural hegemony.
I am saying is that superficial differences, which - for me - include the language of rights, intereferes and inhibits universal communication. I use a relativist argument to disprove faux universalism. You have not answered my arguments against this sort of ‘unviersalism’, only lampooned me with … ‘you pretentious blabbermouth…’
78 Matt Pinkerfield // May 2, 2008 at 5:29 am
The Internet makes detective work easy, a quick look at the BBC website and the videos on this channel http://www.youtube.com/user/Jakapob and you know that something is going on. These cases seem like real evil attacks on the Thai monarchy to any bystander.
I think the more recent Cinema Chotisak and Thaksin the Flag stories are an attempt evil forces to misuse the Lese Majeste law and help hide the real cases of organised political crime and media fiddling by Jakrapob and the BBC filed by this Colonel Boong chap which is the real can of worms.
Jakrapob is apparently attacking and squeezing the media hard to keep his own evil activities from making headlines - it looks like we have a Thaksin Dictatorship here in Thailand once again, I remember Thaksin saying in the videos to vote for PPP
Strange that the Democrats and Thailand’s Special Branch ignore this evil plot and pursue stupid unknown photocopy rubbish! Although Thaksin still has power in Thailand it will be interesting to see how he escapes this time - can money still talk to the police?
79 Dog Lover // May 3, 2008 at 12:31 am
Grasshopper: ‘you pretentious blabbermouth…’ No such term used. You must be confusing me with someone else. The responses to LKY appeared in Foreign Affairs: For this exchange, see Fareed Zakaria, “Culture is Destiny: A Conversation with Lee Kuan Yew,” Foreign Affairs 73 (March-April 1994): 109-29; Kim Dae Jung, “Is Culture Destiny? The Myth of Asia’s Anti-Democratic Values,” Foreign Affairs 73 (November-December, 1994): 189-94. Can’t find the ASSK reply at present.
80 Frank G Anderson // May 31, 2008 at 7:50 pm
31 May 2008
The Bangkok Post reported today that Col. Wattanasak filed a fresh lese majeste complaint against Jonathan Head of the BBC related to the FCCT panel discussion.
Having been publicly accused myself of lese majeste by an overzealous monarchy-patronizing insincere and apparently half-insane Thai but not having had to undergo detailed investigation because there was no evidence (and charges were based on fraudulent claims), I can personally attest to the horrendously painful atmosphere that criminal lese majeste charges in Thailand can produce. People of ill-will, ignorant and indignant for perceived but unprovable in courts outside Thailand slights - but totally forgiving of their own religious and social irresponsibilities - seem to take glee in persecuting others using the monarchy as The Big Hammer.
There is little desire on the part of these sanctimonious troublemakers to arrive at a just resolution of social misunderstanding (on their part), but only to punish and denounce. The lese majeste law is Thailand is really little other than a tool of the police to whip deviants, and is used with distasteful enforcement and punishment. Yes, there are those who are guilty of lese majeste, but why not get this tool out of the hands of the zealots and into the hands of the monarchy itself? Thai police are not to be entrusted with this serious breach of the human ethic. They are, like the rest of Thai society, often unethical, duplicitous, self-serving and ignorant of the negative human conditions they help perpetuate in the Land of Smiles.
The level of sanctimony in Thailand is indeed nauseous, and sadly too often exposed in so-called defense of the revered monarchy. His Majesty himself has many times told the Thai people - who apparently are not listening closely enough - that they have double-standards and cause him headache and trouble by proceeding with lese majeste cases. Why not take a hint and revamp the procedure? It needs it. I have asked the Thai police to revamp it based on the following )and of course, have not received any reply):
7. In addition to the request for an investigation into criminal conspiracy and negligence leading to human rights abuses, I respectfully and humbly ask authorities to kindly review the process of filing lese majesty charges for possible reform as the process is conducted here in Thailand. It seems, for example, that it would be a significant ethical improvement in the process if those making charges of lese majesty were required to:
7.1. sign a sworn statement [affidavit] that the lese majesty accusation is true, accurate and fair to the best of their knowledge.
7.2. sign a separate statement/paragraph that they are aware of possible legal consequences (civil and/or criminal) should the charge be unsupported or determined to be false, etc.
7.3. sign a statement/paragraph that they have no personal motivations or prejudices against the person charged and that the lese majesty complaint is made on the basis of full ethical consideration toward all concerned.
7.4. That local police registering the complaint also sign a statement that they feel the charge is warranted to pass on to central authorities for prosecution, and that a copy of this statement, with supporting documents, is provided to the accused at the time of filing.
7.5. The person accused of lese majesty should also have an early opportunity to make a statement to police before they send the complaint to Bangkok. Although the lese majesty complaint is a unique and serious matter here in Thailand, it has often been abused by those with vested interests, unfair bias and even criminal motives. The police are in a unique position to determine this, and should provide everyone involved at the early stages with an opportunity to respond to the local charge before it becomes an official charge.
I am, of course, interested in any comments.
81 Larry // Jun 2, 2008 at 4:35 am
Frank:
I remember your case and you were innocent, a victim of street scum. These cases do seem to be very suspicious. Please read them all, most people agree that Jon and Jak are guilty
82 Hobbit // Jun 2, 2008 at 8:06 am
Frank - thank you for taking the time to post here. The heart ache of this process is destructive and painful, even if, at the same time, it seems so ridiculous to onlookers.
I can personally attest that this situation is extremely unpleasant for Jonathan and his whole family, both Thai and British alike. This pain is compounded by the seemingly random insults that many people seem compelled to post, as though being demeaning somehow strengthens their cause. Quite the opposite - it makes the insulters look petty and baseless in their accusations and methinks does little to promote respect for the very insitution they claim to be defending.
The one comfort I take in this vendetta on the internet is that plenty can be done to spread this information on the internet not just for the detriment of the people targetted, but also to discourage people from going to Thailand and patronising a country that allows such injustice. The anonymity of the internet cuts both ways.
83 Frank G Anderson // Jun 3, 2008 at 10:24 am
Boycott?
3 June 2008
It’s tough to set aside time to write when the USA campaign is going blazing hot!
It’s a tough call to ask for a boycott of Thailand, yet, the country’s elite and selfish many have been asking for it for a long time. Human rights issues are first and foremost impetus for the idea of a boycott, but so is criminal complicity in the failure to warn those thousands in the south before the tsunami struck. I will forever regret Thai society, media and political leadership not going ahead with an investigation and public report of what really happened. Of course, the same thing goes for Khrue Sae, Takbai, and all those Octobers in the past that have left blood on the streets.
84 Reg Varney // Jun 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Larry: “Please read them all, most people agree that Jon and Jak are guilty.” The point is that they shouldn’t even be investigated under this law that stems from feudal mentalities. But even if there is such a law in place, no one with half a brain could possibly consider Jonathon guilty of anything like lese majeste. The charges publicised to date are simply crazy. For Jakrapob, as a nice story in the Nation a week or so ago pointed out, much worse was said in parliament about the king and monarchy a few decades ago. This is J’s punishment for daring to speak out against a decrepit system (of which he is a part, of course).
85 Frank G Anderson // Jun 5, 2008 at 12:07 am
I have listened to, watched and read what Jakrabhop said and it’s not an unusual mix of vested interests and cloudy thinking with some absolute truth tossed in. He was very brave here in Thailand to say what he did, that is for certain. Having just come out of a conversation with a friend yesterday who was one of the senior drafters of the 2007 charter, I brought up the issue of the intent of the charter vis-a-vis the monarchy. In short, the reply was that the intent was not to change anything. In going further, I was told that while the concept of democracy involves free speech, that even open discussion of the role of the monarchy was itself likely to expose the king and monarchy to possible criticism. Thus open discussion is not going to be permitted. I brought up the contradiction between this and the king’s own words that he wanted to hear criticism if he did something wrong, but got the “Yes, but…” reply.
Loyal royalists here won’t allow the lese majeste law even be reformed, much less revoked. However, there was also a private hint given by a Thai colleague that if HM passed away that no. 2 would not be accepted because of his lack of character and wrongful behavior. Just how the Thai people were going to make their displeasure known was not answered. As well, no. 2 is not known as a humanitarian in dealing with issues.
86 Hobbit // Jun 5, 2008 at 10:58 am
Frank - I am not naive enough to think that the sort of pseudo-exotic escape that Thailand offers combined with the ease of expense, is something the average punter will give up in order to make a political statement. I have loved the time have spent there. I was simply pointing out that dissuading even a few people can spread the awareness and the internet is the perfect tool for the job … should someone feel so inclined.
87 Frank G Anderson // Jun 5, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Understood. Thanks. I tend to think big, and boycott to me meant a real boycott, organized and widespread. Matter of inference. Sorry.
88 Frank G Anderson // Jun 5, 2008 at 3:03 pm
The current controversy over the PAD, pro and con, reminds me that Thailand’s greatest divisiveness problem may not be in society itself but in opposition circles wherever they may be at any particular time. There is a great deal of calling to always conform or be harmonious, and that seems to get in the way of people, leaders and groups from committing to the basic issues and allowing others to have different views.
89 The lèse majesté plot thickens // Jun 10, 2008 at 12:14 am
[...] this does happen from time-to-time it isn’t an everyday event. So…why were they so [...]
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.